At a Glance
Boycott statistics show that consumer refusal is not a niche reaction. Across the supplied surveys, people in many markets say they would stop buying from brands tied to scandals, political positions, unsafe products, or values they reject. The pattern is especially strong in the February 2024 YouGov brand boycotts global study, the May 2024 YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, and the June 2025 Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey.
Fast Facts
- 88% of consumers in the UAE said they would boycott a brand if the company or its leaders acted in ways they object to (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024).
- 74% of consumers in the United States said the same (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024).
- 72% of KSA consumers said they have boycotted a brand because of a scandal (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024).
- 53% of Americans said they are less likely to buy from a company if it takes a stand they do not agree with (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025).
- 85% of respondents in the 2020 TAG and BSI survey said the advertiser is responsible for ensuring ads do not run with dangerous, offensive, or inappropriate content (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020).
Table of Contents
- What boycott statistics measure
- Global willingness to boycott
- Scandal-driven boycotts in the UAE and KSA
- Political and social issue sensitivity in the US
- Brand safety and ad adjacency
- Older boycott reporting and tax records
- What these numbers suggest for brands
What boycott statistics measure
Boycott statistics can describe several different behaviors, and the difference matters. Some numbers capture stated willingness to boycott a brand if it crosses a line. Others measure whether people have already boycotted because of a scandal. Others measure whether consumers avoid brands that support countries, causes, or positions they dislike.
That mix appears throughout the supplied data. The February 2024 YouGov brand boycotts global study focuses on stated willingness. The May 2024 YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey focuses on actual boycott behavior and reasons. The June 2025 Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey focuses on Americans’ reactions to companies speaking publicly on political or social issues. The 2020 TAG and BSI Brand Safety Survey focuses on ad placement and brand safety. The IRS materials add a very different administrative angle on boycott requests and reporting.
This matters because a headline like “people support boycotts” can mean anything from a hypothetical opinion to a past purchase decision. A careful reading separates willingness, action, and regulatory reporting.
Global willingness to boycott
The clearest pattern in the February 2024 YouGov brand boycotts global study is that boycott intent is high across multiple countries. The strongest result in the supplied list is 88% in the UAE (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024). Indonesia follows at 86%, while Hong Kong and Australia both appear at 85% (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024). Canada sits at 84%, Denmark at 83%, and Britain at 82% (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024). The United States is lower than those markets but still high at 74% (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024).
Selected willingness-to-boycott figures
| Country | Share willing to boycott | Source |
|---|---|---|
| UAE | 88% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
| Indonesia | 86% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
| Hong Kong | 85% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
| Australia | 85% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
| Canada | 84% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
| Denmark | 83% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
| Britain | 82% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
| United States | 74% | YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024 |
The same study also asked whether people would boycott brands that do business with countries whose actions they disapprove of. On that measure, Indonesia is again high at 53% (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024). Denmark is at 52%, Sweden at 49%, and Britain at 47% (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024). Hong Kong is at 34%, India at 33%, Italy at 31%, and Mexico at 26% (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024).
The spread matters. Boycott intent is not uniform even when the topic is the same. Some markets show broad readiness to punish brands for indirect ties, while others are more selective. That suggests boycott behavior is not simply about anger. It is also about where consumers draw the line between a brand and the wider political or social environment around it.
Unsure responses still matter
A small but useful detail in the February 2024 YouGov study is the share of respondents who were unsure. Sweden had 11% unsure, while Britain and Denmark were both at 9% unsure (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024). That is not a majority position, but it shows that even in a strongly boycott-prone environment, some consumers do not have a fixed answer. For marketers, that matters because indifference can be moved by the next scandal, the next public statement, or the next product issue.
Scandal-driven boycotts in the UAE and KSA
The May 2024 YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey shifts the emphasis from willingness to action. Here, 66% of UAE and KSA consumers said they have boycotted a brand either temporarily or permanently because of a scandal (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). The split inside that combined figure is notable. KSA is at 72%, while the UAE is at 60% (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). That difference is large enough to suggest that local market conditions shape how consumers respond to a brand crisis.
Reasons people stop using brands
The top reason to stop using a brand in the UAE and KSA survey is a brand’s stand on political or social issues against the consumer’s view. That reason is cited by 49% of UAE and KSA consumers overall (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). When split out, 53% of KSA consumers and 45% of UAE consumers say that a brand’s stand on political or social issues against their view would make them stop using it (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024).
Other reasons are practical and operational rather than ideological. 46% cite faulty, damaged, or dangerous products (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). 39% cite inappropriate, insensitive, or misleading advertising (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). 30% cite unethical work practices (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). 26% cite allegiance to unethical people, associations, or causes (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024).
These are not the same kind of boycott trigger. Some are value disputes. Some are quality disputes. Some are trust disputes. The common thread is that the brand loses the right to be taken at face value.
Boycotts as a pressure mechanism
One of the most important results in the May 2024 survey is that 73% of UAE and KSA consumers agreed that boycotts help convince a company to change its policies or actions (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). KSA is even higher at 77%, and the UAE is 69% (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). This suggests that many consumers do not see boycotts as symbolic gestures. They see them as a practical lever.
That belief can make boycotts more durable. If people think the tactic works, they may be more willing to continue using it. It also means brand recovery has two layers. A company may need to resolve the original issue and convince the market that the boycott has become unnecessary.
Which categories get boycotted after a scandal
The May 2024 survey also identifies categories that consumers are most likely to boycott after a scandal. QSR or restaurants are mentioned by 62% of UAE and KSA consumers overall (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). Within the split, KSA is at 72% and the UAE at 51% (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). Food and beverage brands follow at 59% overall (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). Beauty, hygiene, or personal care brands are at 40%. Household supply or homecare brands are at 35%. Fashion or sportswear brands are at 32% (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024).
A compact comparison helps show the pattern:
| Category boycotted after a scandal | Share | Source |
|---|---|---|
| QSR or restaurants | 62% | YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024 |
| Food and beverage | 59% | YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024 |
| Beauty, hygiene, or personal care | 40% | YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024 |
| Household supply or homecare | 35% | YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024 |
| Fashion or sportswear | 32% | YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024 |
The table points to an everyday-consumption effect. Boycotts are not reserved for rare or luxury brands. They show up in categories people buy frequently and notice quickly. That makes a scandal more likely to have an immediate commercial effect, especially when substitute products are easy to find.
Political and social issue sensitivity in the US
The June 2025 Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey shows a more mixed American reaction to corporate speech. 47% of Americans said it is inappropriate for companies to publicly comment on political or social issues (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). Only 20% said it is appropriate, while 32% said it is neither appropriate nor inappropriate (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). That is a blunt signal that public corporate positioning is not broadly embraced.
Party identification sharpens the difference. 65% of Republicans said it is inappropriate for companies to publicly comment on political or social issues (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). 30% of Democrats said the same, and independents were at 52% (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). So the topic is not just about business strategy. It sits inside a broader political filter that changes how the same corporate message is received.
At the same time, Americans are not uniformly anti-stance. 58% agreed that companies have a responsibility to speak out on issues that may impact their employees, and 49% agreed with the same idea when the issue may impact their customers (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). That means some public engagement is seen as legitimate, but not all of it. The issue itself matters to 55% of Americans, and 32% said it matters a lot (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025).
Buying behavior changes when companies take a stance
The most operationally relevant figures are the purchase-response numbers. 53% of Americans said they are less likely to buy from a company if it takes a stand they do not agree with (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). 30% said they stopped purchasing from a company in the past month because of its stance on politics or current events, and 30% said they reduced spending for the same reason (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). 21% said they went out of their way to make purchases from a company because of its stance on politics or current events (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025).
That split is important. Boycott behavior does not move in only one direction. Some consumers punish, some reward, and many sit in the middle. For a brand, that means public positioning can create both loyalty and backlash at the same time.
Partisan patterns in spending changes
The Ipsos survey also shows different reactions by party. 40% of Democrats said they completely stopped purchasing from a company because of its stance on politics or current events (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). 42% said they reduced spending. Among Republicans, 24% said they completely stopped purchasing and 24% said they reduced spending (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025). Among independents, 29% said they completely stopped purchasing and 28% said they reduced spending (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025).
These are not tiny gaps. They show that boycott and spending shifts can be politically structured. Any brand that treats issue-based communication as a universal audience message is ignoring how filtered the response can be.
Brand safety and ad adjacency
Boycott statistics are not only about buying and not buying. They also shape what people think should happen around ads. The 2020 TAG and BSI Brand Safety Survey shows that many adults want advertising kept away from content they see as dangerous or offensive. 36.1% of U.S. adults said a great deal of online content is dangerous, offensive, or inappropriate, and 49.3% said somewhat (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020). That leaves relatively small shares saying not very much or none at all.
What people want advertisers to avoid
The strongest ad-safety concern in the TAG and BSI data is violent content. 62.8% of U.S. adults said advertisers should prevent ads from running near violent content (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020). 73.5% said advertisers should prevent ads from running near incidents of police brutality (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020). 68.2% said the same for controversial political figures, and 65.8% said it for firearms legislation or policy (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020). 68.0% said advertisers should prevent ads from running near peaceful marches or protests (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020).
Some adjacency concerns are narrower but still substantial. 38.7% said advertisers should prevent ads from running near stolen or pirated movies or TV shows (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020). 31.8% said the same for hate speech. 29.9% said pornographic content. 21.7% said unsafe or hacked websites. 16.3% said illegal drug-related content (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020).
The strongest buying reaction in the survey comes when the brand itself becomes tainted by the ad environment. 62.0% of U.S. adults said they would stop buying a product if an ad infected their computer or mobile device with a virus (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020). 57.7% said they would stop buying a product if its ad appeared next to terrorist recruiting videos. 48.6% said they would stop buying a product if its ad appeared next to racist neo-Nazi propaganda (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020).
That is boycott logic applied to media placement. People are not only evaluating the message. They are evaluating the environment around the message.
Responsibility for safe ad placement
The same survey also identifies where people think responsibility sits. 85% of respondents said the advertiser is responsible for ensuring ads do not run with dangerous, offensive, or inappropriate content (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020). 66.0% said the website owner is responsible. 58.5% said the technology providers are responsible. 41.6% said the ad agency is responsible (TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020).
That hierarchy is useful. It shows that consumers do not see brand safety as someone else’s problem. They start with the advertiser. If boycott risk and ad adjacency risk are connected, then controlling placement becomes part of reputation management rather than a separate media detail.
Older boycott reporting and tax records
The IRS materials in the dataset are different in kind, but they add historical context. For 2003, 1,268 Forms 5713 were filed in the IRS International Boycott Reports study (IRS International Boycott Reports 2003-2004). For 2004, the count rose to 1,343 (IRS International Boycott Reports 2003-2004). About 90% of the Forms 5713 in both years were filed by corporations (IRS International Boycott Reports 2003-2004).
The same study shows more boycott requests reported in 2004 than in 2003. In 2003, 124 taxpayers reported 2,758 boycott requests. In 2004, 131 taxpayers reported 3,205 boycott requests (IRS International Boycott Reports 2003-2004). There were also 36 taxpayers agreeing to participate in an unsanctioned boycott in 2003 and 45 in 2004 (IRS International Boycott Reports 2003-2004).
The 1995 IRS International Boycott Reports table gives another view. All countries had 202 persons receiving requests, 9,144 boycott requests received, and 3,029 agreements (IRS 1995 International Boycott Reports). Among the listed country rows, Bahrain had 43 persons receiving requests, 415 boycott requests received, and 320 agreements (IRS 1995 International Boycott Reports). Kuwait had 79 persons receiving requests, 1,132 boycott requests received, and 798 agreements (IRS 1995 International Boycott Reports). Jordan had 37 persons receiving requests, 355 boycott requests received, and 163 agreements (IRS 1995 International Boycott Reports).
These records are administrative rather than consumer sentiment data. Still, they show that boycott behavior can be tracked, filed, and counted in formal settings. That makes boycott statistics useful for more than commentary. They can be part of compliance, auditing, and corporate reporting as well.
What these numbers suggest for brands
Boycott statistics point to one consistent idea: reputation now moves directly into revenue behavior. Consumers do not need a perfect match between belief and buying. They only need a reason that crosses their personal threshold. Sometimes that threshold is a scandal. Sometimes it is a political statement. Sometimes it is product quality. Sometimes it is the ad environment.
The source data shows three practical lessons. First, boycott readiness is high in many markets, including the UAE, Indonesia, Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Britain, and the United States (YouGov brand boycotts global study, February 2024). Second, when people say boycotts work, they are more likely to treat them as an active pressure tool rather than a one-time reaction (YouGov UAE and KSA boycott survey, May 2024). Third, corporate speech and ad placement can trigger buying changes even when the issue is not a classic product failure (Ipsos Axios/CLYDE survey, June 2025; TAG & BSI Brand Safety Survey 2020).
For readers comparing boycott statistics across surveys, the real takeaway is not that one number settles the question. It is that boycott behavior shows up in many forms, in many markets, and for many reasons. That is why the topic keeps resurfacing in brand strategy, public relations, media buying, and consumer research.